willbeurdaddy -> RE: Was that Plan B, or, like, Plan Z? (12/27/2009 10:00:54 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Sanity A war on terror would be a war on an entity, or rather, entities, wouldn't it. All terrorists in fact. To include individuals, groups (large or small) and even the nations who support them. quote:
ORIGINAL: thornhappy quote:
ORIGINAL: servantforuse Maybe something good will come of this. Maybe, just maybe, President Obama will really start to use the words "war against terror".. So far he didn't want to hurt anyones feelings. The whole term is bogus, and shouldn't have been used in the first place. You don't declare war on a tactic. You declare war on entities. The whole "you dont declare war on a tactic" semantic bullshit was coined to divert attention from the extreme measures that will eventually be taken if we are going to preserve democracy. Everyone knows exactly what the "war on terror" means, and it doesnt refer to declaring war on a tactic. In fact if it were honestly stated it would be "war on the fucking radical islamists who would cut your fucking sisters head off if she isnt wearing a fucking burka and those that suport them, including those that support them by their fucking silence". Kinda has a ring to it, but then "man caused disaster" rolls off the tongue too, doesnt it.
|
|
|
|